I would say a good idea is 5% of the equation

[eliquid]

If those aren't great ideas, but they have been the value proposition behind many ultra-successful companies, then why have the companies been successful?

If it's not the great idea (which clearly you don't think it is), doesn't it have to be the execution that's made those companies great?

Tell me -- why is Burger King more successful than Arbys?

A fast food restaurant is not an idea. It's a market. There is no UVP with being a "fast food restaurant". Everyone owns a fast food restaurant and there is one on every corner. There is nothing unique about a fast food restaurant to have a value proposition if everyone owns one and there is one on every street corner.

There is no UVP to being a fast food restaurant.

Its when you have something different of value that you create your "idea", your UVP/advatnage.

As far as Burger King vs Arbys....

In the last 6-7 years Burger King finally woke up and had the great idea to outsource a lot of it's operations, something Arbys and most fast food restaurants dont do. They also got the great idea to push expansion internationally as well. Arbys is only in 3 countries while Burger King is in a ton more countries ( i dont keep track of how many they are in now ). Great idea to scale out to countries you're competitors aren't.

Burger King had like a 12-year head start in business too.

Burger King had a 12.5B merger with Tim Hortons and is owned in part of Berkshire Hathway. They're more successful if you are counting revenue because they are part of a much larger company that can out spend you to bring in more dollars. Another great idea to spread your great idea. Thats a moat right there. Outspend your opponent and keep your UVP in the minds of customers daily.

Also, hamburgers rule in the United States when it came to fast food. It was a proven concept that worked. Burger King simply made it a better idea by flame grilling and coming up with a "personality" as well, which had been proven with Ronald McDonald. The "flamed broiled" idea was simply a better idea than that of an expensive "roast beef" sandwich for fast food. Also Arbys didn't/doesnt even have a personality.

All in all, Arby didnt have that many great ideas that could have been executed on, which is why its not as big. Burger King did however. If it would have executed on the bad ideas Arby's had, it would have prob. ended up the same.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[eliquid]

A long time ago I was part of a fleet evaluation team for Naval Aviation.
We tested the operational squadrons for readiness.

Some were exceptional
Some average.
Some sucked.

Why?

They all had the same tools.

It was the people. Leadership. Execution.

Apples vs Oranges.

 

[eliquid]

Outsourcing isn't a new idea. In fact, it's not an idea at all. It's execution.

You're reinforcing my point with this comment...



Thousands of companies expand. That's not an idea. It's execution.

Again, reinforcing my point.



12-year head start with the same idea? So, what happened in that 12 years? Oh yes...they executed. If only the idea mattered, a headstart would be meaningless...

Again, reinforcing my point.



Merger...is that a new idea? A UVP? Nope, it's execution.

Again, reinforcing my point.



Spending money??? Is that a UVP? Or is that execution? Pretty sure it's execution.



Wait, nobody flame grilled a hamburger before Burger King? They invented the idea of cooking meat over an open flame?

I don't think so. They just did it better than anyone else on a large scale...in other word, execution,.

Basically, it sounds like you completely agree with me, but either have skewed definitions than most other people (very possibly) or just don't want to admit it. Either way, I think all your points above make my argument for me, and I don't think I can do a better job debating you than you've already done yourself.

So, I'm out...

One more thing you might want to ask yourself though -- why do some franchise stores do better than other franchise stores (of the same franchise)? The ideas are exactly the same, but since they don't make exactly the same amount of money -- in some cases they make widely divergent amounts of money -- what's different?

You asked me why Burger King is beating out Arby's, so I told you.

Your ideas dont have to be new and unique to be great. This statement alone counters most of yours just made.

Also, again you are comparing that just because one company has more sales than another, they are better and more successful

Have you ever thought that maybe Arby's is successful because they are profitable and are on path to hit w/e internal goals they have? They dont have to top Burger King to be successful.

You seem to measure people's and companies half way point to others highlight reels

 

[jon.a]

Apples vs Oranges.

Why?
It's all make a plan and work it.
Success and failure is just measured differently.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[eliquid]

Why?
It's all make a plan and work it.
Success and failure is just measured differently.

Because in your scenario there is no way for a great idea to spring forth, which is the part of the topic of this thread.

If the environment is highly controlled and regulated where everything is forced same, you have no great idea/UVP

 

[jon.a]

Because in your scenario there is no way for a great idea to spring forth, which is the part of the topic of this thread.

If the environment is highly controlled and regulated where everything is forced same, you have no great idea/UVP

Maybe so, I only read the OP. Not the 4 pages between then and now.
Oh and great ideas happen all the time. We retired wooden ships and canvas aircraft some time ago.

 

[eliquid]

Outsourcing isn't a new idea. In fact, it's not an idea at all. It's execution.

You're reinforcing my point with this comment...

Its a great idea ( remember, I never said it needed to be new ) if your competitors aren't doing it

Thousands of companies expand. That's not an idea. It's execution.

Again, reinforcing my point.

Its a great idea ( remember, I never said it needed to be new ) if your competitors aren't doing it. Lets all open up Burger Kings in China and get a foothold before Arbys!

12-year head start with the same idea? So, what happened in that 12 years? Oh yes...they executed. If only the idea mattered, a headstart would be meaningless...

Again, reinforcing my point.

Its an advantage. If I poorly execute on a great idea for 12 years, Im sure I will be farther down the road than you with your well executed poor idea on your first day. That 12 year advantage is big. You cant dismiss it.

Merger...is that a new idea? A UVP? Nope, it's execution.

Again, reinforcing my point.

Its a great idea ( remember, I never said it needed to be new ) if your competitors aren't doing it. Sure, combing my companies talents and resources with another companies resources and talent when my competitors aren't isnt a great idea for an advantage. Laughable!

Spending money??? Is that a UVP? Or is that execution? Pretty sure it's execution.

No it's a great idea. Lets outspend Arbys in these regions and keep our UVP in the customers head daily to win more sales and create a personalty to go with it. A poor idea might be to not do advertising at all and just execute on making more roast beef.

Wait, nobody flame grilled a hamburger before Burger King? They invented the idea of cooking meat over an open flame?

I don't think so. They just did it better than anyone else on a large scale...in other word, execution,.

Its a great idea ( remember, I never said it needed to be new ) if your competitors aren't doing it. Burger King was the first to push it mainstream as flamed broiled. They used it for years, why? because it worked and provided them a UVP. It was a great marketing idea.

Basically, it sounds like you completely agree with me, but either have skewed definitions than most other people (very possibly) or just don't want to admit it. Either way, I think all your points above make my argument for me, and I don't think I can do a better job debating you than you've already done yourself.

So, I'm out...

One more thing you might want to ask yourself though -- why do some franchise stores do better than other franchise stores (of the same franchise)? The ideas are exactly the same, but since they don't make exactly the same amount of money -- in some cases they make widely divergent amounts of money -- what's different?

Could it be because possibly in any way shape or form they had the great idea to get into a great location with foot traffic and some of the others didnt?

We can play this game all day bro.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[eliquid]

Maybe so, I only read the OP. Not the 4 pages between then and now.
Oh and great ideas happen all the time. We retired wooden ships and canvas aircraft some time ago.

Thats because better great ideas came along to replace them, like steel and aluminum.

 

[jon.a]

Thats because better great ideas came along to replace them, like steel and aluminum.

You win. I don't need to be right.

 

[samuraijack]

I remember someone here once said "Do you want to be right? Or do you want to be rich?"

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[eliquid]

You know, my competitors aren't flame broiling burgers, merging with other companies, expanding internationally, moving into locations with foot traffic, etc...

But you think it's a great idea that I do those things just because my competitors aren't? My competitors aren't jumping up and down on one foot either... Should I be doing that as well?

You know, your arguments are getting worse and worse...

I remember earlier in this thread you were the one coming up with ideas like

Time Machines
Flying Cars
Fountain Of Youth, etc

If anyone is far reaching and making arguments worse, it is you.

Just because an idea is great in one vertical, doesn't mean it is in another. Remember, I also said in an earlier post about your Time Machines and Flying cars that "A great idea has to also be realistic and doable." You didnt take that into consideration, again.

Offering flamed grilled hamburgers in RE and jumping on one leg, and expanding internationally prob isnt realistic or doable for you in your vertical. After all, you said you couldnt scale your business and no longer focus on it. I dont think offering flamed girlled patties, time machines, or moving to a foot traffic location helps your specific construction business.

But then again, IDK. You're the master at executing, so unless you execute on those and test them.. how would you know. How about you execute on those for a couple months and let me know. Your execution can cure anything in business and grow it to billions. Please take on the tasks and let us see your billions in 12 months after you execute on them.

You have to look at what is your competitive advantage with your great idea. If your great idea doesnt give YOU a competitive advantage ( which is taking your industry into consideration ), then its not a great idea for you.

Get it?

 

[eliquid]

No im saying if the idea doesnt help your business, its not great. Sorta like your comment about flying machines and grilled patties.

That is unless your starting a new biz selling time machines

Test those ideas out you through out in this thread though with that awesome execution u have and report back though.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

 

[GIlman]

The thing I find hard about this discussion. Is that ideas matter either way. But so does execution.

Either you are an ideas guy and you create a great idea and build a company around it through execution.

OR

You are an execution guy and you start with a weak idea, execute, refine, and through execution discover a great idea.

I think it's retarded to try and separate the two. Either way you gotta either have or pivot to a great idea. and either way you gotta execute to realize the benefit of that idea.

Ideas matter, but so does execution. Stop mental masterbation get and either execute your great idea or execute and pivot until you land on a great idea.

Splitting hairs on if the chicken or the egg is more important is pointless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[SteveO]

Exactly... The fact that every VC I've ever met would tell you that they care MUCH more about the team than the idea tells me that the people who vote with their money believe that execution is more important than the idea.

Anyone who believes otherwise has never tried to raise money...

My banker specifically stated that they would not loan money on a golf course. I was the reason for the loan. They made the loan because of their trust even though they knew I had no golf course experience.

 

[ZF Lee]

For those who come up with endless ideas but never execute, the advice is to just execute on something - anything. Get out of the echo chamber of your own head, and get stuff done.

For those *already* executing, the idea/model/lane becomes the most important.

Different levels of advice for different people?

I guess it boils down to whether you're getting stuff done or not?

Welp, I don't know how I ran into this thread.
But I saw some good arguments here. And I like this gem, Andy. Thanks!

Bump.

 

[GoGetter24]

Good thread to bump.

But it really isn't 5%. It's more like 40%. If we're truly talking about a good idea, one that's been confirmed against the market, and is truly well conceived and one that you've thoroughly challenged the merits of, then it's very important.

Everyone likes to say the glib "fail quickly" stuff. But it's a very unwise way to behave. You want the risk of the idea failing to be as small as possible.

Every idea execution has costs. Each six month block of your life you throw into executing an idea that fails is 6 months of stress, long hours, and age lost, that you can't get back.

Being frivolous about failure is very foolish. You should reasonably expect failure. But you should do everything in your power to prevent executing on an idea that was doomed from the start.

The Thomas Edison stuff was an abject lie. He did not construct 10,000 different light bulbs. Nobody has the true number of prototypes he built. The exact quote is this:
"I speak without exaggeration when I say that I have constructed three thousand different theories in connection with the electric light, each one of them reasonable and apparently to be true. Yet only in two cases did my experiments prove the truth of my theory. My chief difficulty, as perhaps you know, was in constructing the carbon filament, the incandescence of which is the source of the light." -Edison
"I said: 'Isn't it a shame that with the tremendous amount of work you have done you haven't been able to get any results?' Edison turned on me like a flash, and with a smile replied: 'Results! Why, man, I have gotten lots of results! I know several thousand things that won't work!'" -Edison

That gives no data on how many actual prototypes he built, how much of his personal time he spent building them, how many people he was by that point able to employ to do work for him (it was after he'd already released his phonograph & microphone), what the costs per failed design were in time and money.

It's 40% idea, 60% execution. We're not machines. We can't continuously execute failed ideas without bearing the costs.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[jcvlds]

Shit. Thank God this thread got bumped. Such a good read and mental stimulation. I will add my 2 cents around this debate and would like to invite @JScott and @eliquid to re-visit this topic, about 2 years later, to hear how their view on this has changed (or not).

Here's why separating 'idea' from 'execution' and saying one is more important than the other or relating to them in terms of a % is a terrible way to think about a business.

For any business to get started and have a good profitability it needs to have an offering within a market that has a certain (or collection of) demand, and it needs to be able to capture a piece of the market at a cost that leaves room (margins) for profit. The question for many new entrants becomes, 1) Where do I go?/ Who do I serve?/ What do I offer.. and 2) How do I compete/win?

These 2 questions, Where do I play, and How do I win, become the basis for your business strategy. The decisions you make for these two questions will drive EVERYTHING else that you do in your business. All decisions and actions within your functions/depts/business areas (so many terms used but referring to the same thing; i.e. Sales & Marketing, Supply Chain, Customer Service, HR, etc) should be supporting the two answers you made to the two strategy questions.

I believe this is the underlying component to what people often refer to as an 'idea'.
The [business] 'idea' is really a plan for competing in the market that consists of many sub-ideas (functional strategies and decisions). eLiquid talks about having a UVP and a unique differentiator to separate yourself from the competition. This lies within the answer and decision you make to strategy question #2 (How do I win?).

When you decide on which market to compete in, you really only have a few choices with how to compete... you can try to become a price leader (selling the cheapest) but it is not just as easy as saying 'I will price my product cheaper than everybody'. Okay.. what will that do? You might be selling at a loss because the margins are already razor-thin. You might be cutting industry margins from low to even lower and F*cking the market up for all the players. The only way I see you being able to pull this off is by having special access to raw materials/goods that lets you have it cheaper than everybody else out there, but this is is really really hard to do. I would never want to play in this game. The other way on how to compete can be to take a differentiated approach by niching down within the market and positioning yourself as unique relative to customers who value that positioning and are willing to pay a bit more for than the generic/more mainstream market.

That was long.. sorry. But the concept to be extracted is that the 'idea' that people often talk about is really referring to a business strategy. Within your overall business strategy and individual functional strategies lies other questions and decisions that you will have to make that is aligned with and supports the overall strategy. What does this mean? Well, an example can be the things JScott mentioned around all the 'ideas' that Google had and acted on. All the things Google did supported their overall business strategy. These ideas were part of the functional strategies.

Let me see if I can try to think of a more simpler and local example. Let's say you want to open an online shop in the kitchenware category. You've answered your 'Where will I play/compete' question. Now How will you win? There are so many kitchenware stores and brands. You could aim to become the cheapest price and so you will capture so much market share that the volume will let you beat everybody and rake huge profits. If you find a way, awesome, but I personally think this is super duper hard. Only thing you will cause is a price war and the industry margins will collapse, or your more established competitors will play the price war game with you even lower, crushing you, and then once you exit they can raise their prices back to normal.

Another route could be if you found a niche that really value a specific type of appliance or extra features, or variety, or you name it. The thing is, you find that there is demand/need for something that current competitors are not addressing [well enough]. The overall market here is smaller, obviously, than the more broad kitchenware market but you find that there is very little competition, and you are confident you can compete and hopefully beat them. You decide you want to play in the smaller market where you can win. Great, you've answered the strategy question #2.

The next part: EXECUTION

Up to this point, all you have is an 'idea'. You have a (hopefully) well-thought out 'idea' or business strategy along with functional strategies and decisions that will support your overall strategy. What's left is the Execution part.

To me, Execution means nothing more than literally ACTING/PERFORMING the decisions you make. It's the daily actions that need to be occurring in order to realize the business strategy and goals. In your strategy and planning, you have to obviously create a bridge between your idea and how it will manifest itself. These are tangible actions and measurable activities that will need to occur in order to fulfill and execute the plan. Execution is THE ONLY WAY that your idea becomes a reality and exists physically in our world. Without execution, it will always remain in your mind (and minds of others), but never in the real world.

What makes an 'idea' a success?
I really like the point eLiquid makes here about how to measure the success of an idea or a business. Clearly, one's measure of success can vary greatly to another's. I agree with his point that a $100K business could be deemed as successful as a $1M, $10M, $100M business. The criteria lies in the context. Let's compare our example online kitchenware shop to an international brand in the likes of Kitchenaid. Well, if our shop starts out as a $100K business, if we compare it by revenues, some would say ours is a failure compared to Kitchenaid. But what if our example entrepreneur is profiting $40K because his niche profit margin is really good and he is able to cover his personal living expenses? And what if that entrepreneur completely dominated his niche next year and grew to $500K, then $1M the next year, and $5M the next? The choice is up to him if he wants to grow. Likewise, if he wants to grow he will only do so in a few ways... the niche market grows organically and because he is a leader in the space he rides the wave and captures more market share; another way is to use his niche dominance to move into an adjacent-niche, and then another, and eventually being big enough to compete in an overall broad market if he wants to. In each decision to grow, he will need to have another 'idea', or another business strategy in how he will win in the new space. And then he will have to execute.


I know that was very long and perhaps some parts were unnecessary. But I had fun writing about this and hopefully get some feedback or valid criticism to my thinking from eLiquid and JScott

Overall, I think separating 'idea' from 'execution' and saying one is more important than the other or relating to them in terms of a % is a bad way to think about a business. I believe Idea = 100% and Execution = 100%. They are two sides of the same coin that work together to make the business actually exist.

 

[GoGetter24]

I believe Idea = 100% and Execution = 100%. They are two sides of the same coin that work together to make the business actually exist.

But the question is balance. Idea work and execution work need to be separated. You have to commit to an idea, and then execute on it hard until you know if it's failed or not.

You can't be second guessing the idea once you commit, or you'll never get anything finished. And you can't spend all your time thinking about the idea or you'll never get anything started.

So I disagree it's a bad way to think about business: it's the only way. Basic OODA loop stuff.

 

[jcvlds]

But the question is balance. Idea work and execution work need to be separated. You have to commit to an idea, and then execute on it hard until you know if it's failed or not.

You can't be second guessing the idea once you commit, or you'll never get anything finished. And you can't spend all your time thinking about the idea or you'll never get anything started.

The debate in this thread is around what is more important to the success of the business. Not around balance. The way you are phrasing it is from a matter of 'time allocation'. You are referring to how much time should be allocated to the 'idea', your business strategy vs the execution part to succeed/fail. That is a different perspective than saying which is more important to the success overall.

The reason I think you shouldn't necessarily separate the two is because you need to be doing both, or nothing will happen. You should treat your ideas as fluid, ever-adapting. What does this mean? That your business strategy should not be set in stone. You do some market research to develop your strategy/plan/idea which at this stage is a hypothesis you are making. You then have to execute on it to find out whether your hypothesis was correct or not. If it wasn't, you should try to find the reasons why, the assumptions you perhaps made that were incorrect, and use that to re-shape your idea/strategy. You then execute again to test.

You mentioned the question was balance. It shouldn't be a question, it's the only way to go about it. Both hand-in-hand.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[rollerskates]

Yesterday I was looking through my daily notebook from 9 years ago to see if I had any unexecuted ideas I could work on and something I had written down 9 YEARS AGO has become a huge industry. It existed then but has since exploded like crazy.

I am working on other versions of it because it is something that will always be useful, but it's something that's harder to innovate now because of the sheer number of variations available.

The takeaway? Execute now and innovate because it will be harder later on.

 

[eliquid]

Without dragging the thread out again, it has been 2 years now.

I think overall there was one main point that was missed in my post, the fact I did write that you need both.

Also, you gotta play to your strengths.

I'm not here to offend anybody. So anyone that reads the next couple lines needs to remember that.

However, we are all different people. We have different strengths and you have to play to those strengths.

Are you not a day dreamer? Do you have a hard time being creative? Maybe you just aren't good at coming up with good ideas?

If so, maybe you reach success executing better and agree to that point of view. You take a bad idea and execute on it, fail.. take another and fail, take another and fail, and at some point you have executed enough to know what not to do and turn those bad ideas into a good one that when you execute on it, it works.

Some people just can not come up with a great idea. Sure, THEY think its a great idea, but out in the real world it's just not. That's ok if you struggle or can't develop a great idea. Just like discipline and willpower, you have to mentally "workout" and develop the mental muscle for what is a great idea.

You aren't just gifted willpower, discipline, and other mental gifts. You have to practice and develop yourself over time for it. Why wouldn't the same be true for creativity and ideas?

Now the flip side...

Are you more of big thinker than a doer? Do you come up with ideas easily ( good or bad ), do you analyse and research the idea and improve it in your head over and over again? Do you put all the pieces in your head from A to Z easily like Nikola Tesla? Would you rather dream it up, perfect it, but have someone else ( potentially ) complete it? Then the "idea" will probably get you further than executing on something because that's not your strength.

Even without that above thought flow, I still say that the idea ( 2 years later ) is above execution for the simple reason I could sell an idea or patent it. Even without that, your "idea" has to be good enough to execute on. Nobody wants to buy a poor "idea" no matter how you have executed on it. At some point you execute your bad idea into a good idea ( if you are not an idea person ) so the idea is what eventually gets you successful.

Why?

Because you could execute on poor ideas your whole life. No one is going to buy it. You keep executing and executing and executing. You never develop something good or great. But my great idea I never fully execute on? I at least have a shot of executing 5% and having my lawyer patent it and then hire a salesman to pitch the idea to companies to purchase. You just don't get that the other way around.

There is some truth though ( which I mentioned 2 years ago ) that a good ideas needs some execution. However, the execution can be outsourced which takes it off my plate and why I can put more into "ideas".

In the end, it shouldn't be "idea vs execution". Both are needed.

In my view, I spend more time in the "idea" ( the 95% ) than the "execution" ( the 5%) phase. Because I spend more time on the idea, it IS more important to me.

Look at McDonalds. Who executes at most of the stores? Teenagers and lower level. You think they execute well? No. But the idea was to create a process/system that ANYONE can follow and is repeatable so that execution is at the bare min.

Look at the assembly line. The idea was to make tasks smaller and focused among many people in a repeatable and predictable way. The execution each person does on the line is, well, very minimal and small and without much thought.

In both of the 2 above examples, almost ANYONE can come in and execute for McDonalds or Ford. The execution they do doesn't have to be good. Why? Because the great idea solved not having to have good execution.

I've done pretty well in my life following this same method.

Other people have done well focusing more on what they want to call "execution".

But then again, you have to consider what I wrote above too about YOUR strengths. Where are your strengths? Follow that.

Mine is with crafting great ideas.

.

 

[eliquid]

Yesterday I was looking through my daily notebook from 9 years ago to see if I had any unexecuted ideas I could work on and something I had written down 9 YEARS AGO has become a huge industry. It existed then but has since exploded like crazy.

I am working on other versions of it because it is something that will always be useful, but it's something that's harder to innovate now because of the sheer number of variations available.

The takeaway? Execute now and innovate because it will be harder later on.

Good point, but I label this not as execution.

I label it "you didn't strike when the iron was hot", or "you didn't make hay while the sun was shining".

I think your example is a tad different than execution.

A good idea, or good execution, is worthless if you miss the timing of your market.. no matter what. In a way, this falls back to your idea. Would it even be a good idea to jump into the market now? Was it really a good idea to jump into the market then?

Your idea has to take that into consideration.

At some point, not enough thought or research was put into the idea 9 years ago for you to have considered it a "great" idea. You must have though it was just an "OK" or "average" idea, which is why you didn't put time to execute on it back then.

When you hit on a great idea that has good market timing, you will execute. However, market timing is one consideration of if your idea is "great" or not.

.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[MJ DeMarco]

Obviously the semantics of "idea" needs to be agreed upon before one can debate the veracity of the idea itself.

• I have an idea for a social network!
  ^^^ That's worth about .01%.
• I have an idea for a social network and here's how it would work, propagate, grow, and be funded! ^^^ That's worth a bit more.

 

[eliquid]

Obviously the semantics of "idea" needs to be agreed upon before one can debate the veracity of the idea itself.

• I have an idea for a social network!
  ^^^ That's worth about .01%.
• I have an idea for a social network and here's how it would work, propagate, grow, and be funded! ^^^ That's worth a bit more.

Good interjection.

For me, it falls inline more with the second one..

I have an idea for a social network and here's how it would work, propagate, grow, and be funded!

Basically, all of the pieces are already in my head planned out and mapped out before any execution is done to put it into production that includes such items as what you brought up.

.

 

[eliquid]

I should add 1 point of clarification to this message that might help others understand where I come from.

If you made it to the 2018 Fastlane Summit and saw my presentation, you will remember that I only play in my own sandbox of what I am an authority of.

All of my SaaS's where digital marketing related. I played pretty much in just that 1 space. I have 20+ years in that space.

Now that doesn't mean I don't venture out to other things, but 90% of my time and effort was concentrated in that 1 space.

At that level, I know all the other "if's" that go into what I call a great idea.. like @MJ DeMarco showed as an example with the "how it will be funded", "how it propagate", "how it will grow". I know these things if I am toying with a great idea in my authority space.

Some of these additional plans you just won't know if you are playing in a space that is unfamiliar territory for you. But to me, if you are in unfamiliar territory, that begs the question of if that's a great idea for you to be in that territory. Part of my presentation at the summit went over this and the whys behind it.

I'm not saying you shouldn't venture out. I am just pointing out my thoughts on it.

Right now I am venturing out into:

• Investing
  
• Machine Learning
• Publishing
  
• Real Estate

I'm not an expert/authority in any of those areas. Yet, I am getting into them.

However, the practice I have had for the 20+ years that I crafted good/great ideas ( within in my authority space ) has given me lessons I can reuse in new unfamiliar areas like what I am venturing into above.

Things like, catching an early trend.

Are you catching an early trend, or creating a whole new trend ( You don't really want to be creating a new trend )? Maybe you are at the end of the trend? Is your idea even applicable to a trend? Do you even know how to spot a trend. How do you know this is a trend and not a just a fad that will be gone in 12 months?

That's one example of what goes into a great idea for me ( potentially, I don't judge everything by trend-worthy-ness ).

Have you planned out the major obstacles that could happen in 12-24 months? Not just with the trend itself, but with things like CONTROL ( Amazon anyone? ) and the platforms you rely on. What's the exit plan? Did you plan for multiple income streams or just 1 ( like with standard ecommerce )?

I could go on and on.

@jcvlds touched on maybe calling this a strategy, more than an idea ( I think that is what he was getting at ). But to me, these things are fundamental to the idea. Maybe other people don't see it that way.

My idea for SERPWoo could have just been, "lets build a rank tracker". I think this is what most people consider the idea, the most top level abstraction possible. To me, the idea was actually:

• lets build a SERP monitoring application that allows people to research their true SERP competitors
• spot algo updates no one else finds
• allows ORM professionals an easier process for helping their clients with Online Reputation Management
• offers a different way ( that is more effective ) for SEO's to spot link building opportunities and judge how difficult a niche is BEFORE they build a site
• and allows someone to research back in time what their keywords SERPs looked like so they can actually tell if their online marketing is really working or if they simply moved up/down because someone else in the SERP got penalized above them

Add in some other things I haven't typed like market timing, competitors, funding, CENTS, etc.

This is idea generation for me.

I know I haven't still clearly defined it for some of you, but then again I never really thought I was going to be in a position to possibly have to. The idea to me is much more than the top level abstraction or what would be the "explain it to grandma" pitch.

.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[rollerskates]

Good point, but I label this not as execution.

I label it "you didn't strike when the iron was hot", or "you didn't make hay while the sun was shining".

I think your example is a tad different than execution.

A good idea, or good execution, is worthless if you miss the timing of your market.. no matter what. In a way, this falls back to your idea. Would it even be a good idea to jump into the market now? Was it really a good idea to jump into the market then?

Your idea has to take that into consideration.

At some point, not enough thought or research was put into the idea 9 years ago for you to have considered it a "great" idea. You must have though it was just an "OK" or "average" idea, which is why you didn't put time to execute on it back then.

When you hit on a great idea that has good market timing, you will execute. However, market timing is one consideration of if your idea is "great" or not.

.

Oh gosh, don't tell me that, I have many lists of unexecuted ideas. This particular one would have been good then. You're probably right about jumping in now too. :/

 

[Chromozone]

This was a really interesting read. Thank you everyone for contributing.

I personally see execution as a means to "discover" new territory.

The business I'm working on now started off with an important problem, but one I suspect a lot of people didn't think of as profitable. As a result I don't know anyone that has executed on it seriously.

However by executing on it I've discovered a bunch of hidden problems that are really compelling and could make the business very profitable quite soon.

In essence, it seems to me that instead of humans discovering new land/countries to conquer, we are now mostly fighting to discover new ideas. But, often these great ideas come out of incessant tinkering with an idea.

I enjoyed the discussion regarding Google earlier on re: page rank. It seems like a good example of what I'm trying to say. The founders were interested in search, they couldn't make search profitable and then they figured out page rank. But they couldn't have stumbled on the idea of page rank without executing on search.

I also think it's plain wrong to stick to an idea because it's "great". It means you don't allow yourself to discover and possibly stumble on something really important. I've seen a number of companies raise money and then blow up (in a bad way) because as soon as they raised money they had to stick to their so called "business plan" which doomed them to failure.

 

[eliquid]

I enjoyed the discussion regarding Google earlier on re: page rank. It seems like a good example of what I'm trying to say. The founders were interested in search, they couldn't make search profitable and then they figured out page rank. But they couldn't have stumbled on the idea of page rank without executing on search.

You have it backwards.

PageRank/BackRub came before the need for profit. PageRank actually came about back at Standford, way before they monetized it. So the discussion about PageRank earlier in this thread is actually misinformation. From Larry himself -

"In graduate school at Stanford University, I had about ten different ideas of things I wanted to do, and one of them was to look at the link structure of the web. My advisor, Terry Winograd, picked that one out and said, 'Well, that one seems like a really good idea.'
So I give him credit for that." -- Larry Page, [1]

That link structure he is talking about, was PageRank. See, it started as an idea first. One that was a "really good idea" from their advisor at Standford. This was way before they tried to monetize or even have Google.

I also think it's plain wrong to stick to an idea because it's "great". It means you don't allow yourself to discover and possibly stumble on something really important. I've seen a number of companies raise money and then blow up (in a bad way) because as soon as they raised money they had to stick to their so called "business plan" which doomed them to failure.

Well, this is what happens when you take VC money. Not really because of the great idea.

.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Kak]

I firmly believe that on average a person only rises as far as they can lead. Leadership is, in my experience, the most important part of business.

Sacrifice and perseverance is another very important aspect. The more you are willing to sacrifice, the more money you'll probably make.

Idea? Yeah, probably 5 percent of the equation even though a good one won't hurt.

 

[Kak]

Nothing has changed for me. I honestly haven't had any good ideas in the past two years, but I continue to execute on my average-idea businesses (and start some new ones) and I continue to make a lot of money...

There is another avenue that I never saw discussed here... Executing your way to new adaptations of the original idea and putting yourself in position to notice, and seize new (even entirely new) opportunities ONLY comes from execution. You won't notice this shit if you aren't turning over rocks.